Morzaria, S.P.

Mukhebi, A.W.

Perry, Brian D.

CGSpace

  Economics of an East Coast fever immunization trial at theKenya CoastA.W. Mukhebi, S.P. Morzaria and B.D. PerryInternational Laboratory for Research on Animal DiseasesP.O. Box 30709Nairobi, KenyaThis paper summarizes the results of a financial analysis of an East Coast fever (ECF)immunization trial at the Kenya Coast. The details of the trial methodology, design andbioeconomic data generated are presented by Morzaria et al. (1988) and by Morzariaelsewhere in these proceedings.Eighty beef cattle were immunized and a similar group of 80 were left unimmunized as acontrol. The immunized group was divided into 4 sub-groups of 20 animals each, the sub-groups identified as A, B, C and D. The control group was also divided into 4 sub-groups (E,F, G and H) of 20 animals each. Sub-groups A and E were sprayed with an acaricide twice aweek, B and F were sprayed once every 3 weeks, C and G had prolonged-release acaricide-impregnated ear tags inserted into each animal ear, and D and H had no tick controltreatment.All groups were maintained and grazed together in an ECF-endemic area on a farm for 9months, starting in May 1985. The bioeconomic data collected at the end of the trial includedstarting and ending liveweights; the numbers of surviving animals; the numbers and causes ofdeaths; and the quantities and costs of materials, drugs, acaricides and veterinary servicesused for each sub-group. Partial budgeting was used to derive gross benefits, costs that varyamong subgroups, and net financial benefits per kg of starting liveweight for each subgroup.Dominance analysis was used to identify dominant and dominated subgroups. This was donefirst by listing the sub-groups in the order of their increasing costs that vary per kg of startingliveweight with corresponding net benefits. Any sub-group that had net benefits that were lessthan or equal to those of a sub-group with lower costs that vary was identified as dominated.Conversely, any sub-group with net benefits that were equivalent or greater than those of asub-group with higher costs that vary was identified as dominant. A farmer would not choosea dominated practice over a dominant one, because the former would have higher costs andlower benefits than the latter. It is the dominant sub-groups that are candidates forrecommendation to the farmer.Marginal analysis was used to calculate marginal rates of return of the dominant sub-groupsand to identify the sub-group that would maximize financial benefits to the farmer.The gross benefits for treatments A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H were Kenya shillings (KShs)12.50, 11.35, 11.71, 11.88, 11.39, 8.71, 9.07 and 8.30, respectively (KShs 16.00 = US$1,January 1986). The costs that vary were KShs 0.81, 0.55, 0.71, 0.63, 0.62, 0.90, 1.21 and1.15, respectively. The net benefits per kg of starting liveweight were therefore KShs 11.69,10.80, 11.00, 11.25, 10.77, 7.81, 7.86 and 7.15, respectively.Sub-groups C, E, F, G and H were dominated. Sub-groups B, D and A were dominant in thatorder of increasing net benefits. The marginal rate of return between B and D was 562.5% andbetween D and A was 244.4%. In financial terms, sub-group A generated the highest benefitsto the farmer in this trial.The analysis shows that the immunized sub-groups yielded greater financial benefits, due tolower ECF mortality and higher weight gains, than the non-immunized sub-groups. Of theimmunized sub-groups, the one that was sprayed with acaricide twice a week yielded thehighest financial benefits. However, such intensive use of acaricides would not berecommended for widespread adoption, because acaricides are becoming increasingly moreexpensive and less available for smallholder farmers in many countries affected by ECF.These results demonstrate that immunization is financially superior to non-immunization, butthat the frequency of acaricidal application after immunization for tick and other tick-bornedisease control requires further on-farm research under various environmental conditions.REFERENCEMorzaria, S.P., Irvin, A.D., Wathanga, J., D'Souza, D., Katende, J., Young, A.S., Scott, J. andGettinby, G. (1988). The effects of East Coast fever immunization and different acaricidaltreatments on the productivity of beef cattle. Veterinary Record 123: 313-320.  

Economics of an East Coast Fever immunization trial at the Kenya coast

https://cgspace.cgiar.org/bitstream/10568/49775/1/Economics.pdf

Economics of an East Coast Fever immunization trial at the Kenya coast

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

CGSpace